I would like to give the forum a comparison between the Walther PPS and the Ruger LC9. My household owns both.

My daily carry for the last year or so has been a Walther PPS 9mm in an IWB holster. When wearing a heavy sweater or jacket I carry a Glock 19 in a shoulder holster. Basically, the G19 is my winter carry, the little Walther is for the other 3 seasons.

I have been shooting Glocks for 20 years. Although far from “perfect”, they are very reliable and rugged, and they fit my hand well. For better or worse, I have become very accustomed to the Glock trigger, the Glock manual of arms, and the Glock grip angle. I selected the Walther PPS because it is very “glock-like”, same manual of arms, same trigger (but probably better), and with the larger palm grip fitting it has the same grip as a Glock. Basically it is the single stack G26 that I always wished Glock would have made, but Walther beat them to it. I bought this gun before the Ruger LC9 or Sig 290 were on the market.

My wife has always carried a snub 38. But in the summer she has found it is increasingly hard to dress around the gun. The main problem was the thickness of the cylinder. She had no problem concealing my Walther, but shooting it caused a pain in the web of her hand, and caused her thumb to go numb.

So we went looking at small 380 pistols for her. After shooting the Bersa and Sig 232, she was under-whelmed by the power of the 380. She simply did not have confidence that a bullet with such light recoil could actually stop an attack. So then she tried the Ruger LC9. I thought she would have the same problem with it as she had with the Walther, but the grip is just different enough that the LC9 worked for her. So we bought one.

Comparing the Ruger LC9 to the Walther PPS is very interesting. Concealability-wise, they are essentially the same. The PPS looks bigger, but it is an illusion caused by its blocky proportions. Both guns are nicely dehorned with blended corners. The slide width of both guns is the same. The Walther is just ever so slightly thinner in the grips. In overall length, the Ruger is about a ¼ inch smaller. In height, it depends on which magazine is in each gun. The Ruger has a 7 round mag, which can have a pinky hook extension attached or not, but my wife wants the pinky hook. My Walther has both a 6 rounds “no pinky” mag, and a 7 round mag that lets you use your pinky. The Walther with the 6 round is slightly smaller in height than the Ruger. The Walther with the 7 round mag is slightly taller than the Ruger.

Shooting the two is also interesting. As I said, the Walther has a glock-like striker fire trigger, but a little smoother and crisper than a new-in-the-box Glock. I have an 1991 G17 with thousands of rounds through it, and the PPS is like that smoothed-out G17. The Ruger LC9 has a DAO trigger, and it is long. It is a light trigger, but a long pull. There is no second strike capability on the LC9 because the slide must cycle to partially-cock the hammer. My wife has been shooting DA revolvers for a long time, so she is very comfortable and accurate with this little Ruger. If you are coming from a Glock or 1911, be prepared to do a little practice.

The PPS has no manual safety and no magazine safety. The LC9 has both. The manual thumb safety on the LC9 is redundant in my opinion, since no revolver ever needed one. Fortunately, it clicks firmly into the fire position, and can be left there forever. The LC9 sights are fine, but not quite as visible as the excellent PPS sights. The PPS has a higher bore axis than does the LC9, and thus the PPS has a little more muzzle flip. Even with the extra muzzle flip, the excellent PPS trigger allows me to get on target and shoot faster than the Ruger.

Accuracy when slow shooting from a bench is excellent with both. I was surprised that the Ruger LC9 was as accurate as the PPS. With either gun, I can produce a 10 yard 5 shot ragged hole that can be covered with a quarter. But the DAO LC9 requires more concentration to do it.

In terms of fit/finish and craftsmanship, the Ruger is a well made and very functional weapon. It seems solid and well built. The Walther is a step up, and has a feel of fine craftsmanship. For some people this quality is very important. I have been happy with Glocks for 20 years, so this is not a high priority for me. That said, I certainly appreciate and enjoy the craftsmanship of my PPS.

As for price... I paid $620 for the PPS in 2010, plus $65 for a spare mag. I don’t think the prices have changed much since then. That is about $100 over the very comparable Glock 26. The Walther is no bargain, but it offers features I could not find in other guns.

Last week we paid $390 for the Ruger LC9, plus $25 for a spare mag. At this price, the Ruger is one of the greatest bargains in concealed carry weapons.

comparison photos of the PPS and the LC9. I put a Crimson Trace on the LC9... I feel better if my wifes carry weapon has a laser. She is an experienced shooter, but if push comes to shove, I want her to have every possible advantage.

WildBill... I agree. The Walther is in a different class. There is a pleasure that comes from handling and operating it. Shooting high grade weapons is very enjoyable.

But my opinion is that an outstanding self defence weapon does not need to be a high grade weapon that exudes craftsmanship and class. It needs to be a reliable and rugged tool. It needs to be designed to maximize the shooter's potential to hit a moving target at close range under stressful circumstances. Basic no-frills 1911's, Glocks, Sig 226/229, S&W J-frames, Berreta 92's ... these kind of weapons don't inspire much passion (particularly the glocks and J-frames), but they work, and they work well. My prefered carry weapon is a glock, but if all of my glocks were lost in a flood, I would not shed a tear. I would file an insurance claim and buy the identical replacements.

While I admire and appreciate the quality of the PPS, that is not why I bought it. If Gaston had gotten off his duff and built a single stack version of the G26, I would have bought it... probably saving $150 in the process. The PPS has more "quality" than I need, but it is an outstanding weapon.

Just browsing the Walther forums and all of a sudden i am not sure anymore. There are disproportionate number of reported issues with the PPS (feed/ejection), if I like it I'll make sure to get one with the BB code (2011)

"count me in the skeptical crowd that is calling out your review...the PPS is amazing...the LC9 is a dressed up PF-9."

I am not sure what that means ... "calling out your review"... Do you disagree with something I said?

I don't want to imply that the PPS is not worth the price. For me it is absolutely worth the price I paid, because it is the only gun on the market that does what it does. My point was this: If Glock had made the PPS, it would not have been as nice, it would have been less expensive, but like all Glocks it would have been an excellent combat weapon.

I have never shot a Kel Tec PF-9, but I handled one along with the Ruger LC9. I have a minimum standard of fit-n-finish, and the Kel Tec did not meet it. The LC9 did. It does not bother me one bit that Ruger may have borrowed design ideas from Kel Tec. There has not been a truly original handgun design in almost a century, they all copy from each other... The FN 5.7 may be the exception.

I have no experience with the LC9, but I have the PPS; a great CC pistol. In giving up my full sized guns and and Glocks for more convenient CC options, the PPS has been my best and favorite buy, with my LCP coming in second.

However, the PF-9 has lighter trigger or the same (variation) as the LC9. The LC9 is a copy of the PF-9. With a safety and a heavier or equal weigth trigger.

No one is calling the PF-9 trigger awesome (well, go to KTOG and in fact jesus created the trigger). I suspect those who are proud owners of the LC9 have never held or fired the PF-9. They are nearly identical.

To say the LC9 has more flip is strange. Flip is not soley measured by bore height as you surmise. The PPS is heavier. I found the PF-9 and LC9 to be equal to a +P 38 in a airweight revolver. The PPS feels like a normal sized 9mm framed gun.

Given the trigger, the PPS should be more accurate without practice. Difference in weight and length of travel of the trigger. Not a science, I completely agree, but the average shooter should *in theory* have less movement in the gun in a normal pull of the PPS.

I can only tell you that with around a thousand rounds of ammo through my PPS, it has been completely reliable, and seems to be easier for me to maximize my potential with it, than with other pistols it's size.

I also found this review informative. I'm a relative newcomer and the LC9 is my first subcompact. I don't mind the (what feels to me) light, smooth, but long trigger pull. I like everything else about the gun as well and feel confident and reliable with it.

My wife will also be in the market for a concealable 9mm soon and the PPS will be one of the top choices to try, so I may have a chance to compare them, which I look forward to.

While I admire and appreciate the quality of the PPS, that is not why I bought it. If Gaston had gotten off his duff and built a single stack version of the G26, I would have bought it... probably saving $150 in the process. The PPS has more "quality" than I need.

You can never have "too much quality" with a firearm you may need to defend your life or your family's.

And in terms of "saving money" -- what value do you put on your loved one's lives? Apparently it's $150.00.

I've had a 9mm PPS for almost three years now and it's been perfect with an assortment of fmj and jhp ammo.

The Ruger products have problems galore and can't hold a candle to the PPS.

__________________
"A man can be destroyed but not defeated".
Ernest Hemingway

You can never have "too much quality" with a firearm you may need to defend your life or your family's.

And in terms of "saving money" -- what value do you put on your loved one's lives? Apparently it's $150.00.

I have to throw down the BS Flag on that comment. By that logic, the only firearms suitable for carry are the most expensive, high-end firearms. Those people armed with mere glocks, S&Ws, Walthers, and Berrettas are fools because they are not carrying a Les Bauer or Ed Brown. This comment uber-failed.

You missed my point in my first posting... The PPS is a great gun, and does what no other gun currently does... Namely It is glock-like single stack 9mm/40 with a 0.9 inch slide width that costs 20% more than a glock. The LC9 is completely different, but for ~ $380 retail, it offers great value. The PPS and the LC9 are both different from each other, but both work.

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.